R-E-S-P-E-C-T

After reading Kate’s post yesterday, something started bubbling up from the dark recesses of my mind (and, oh, let me tell you, my mind has dark recesses) and that was how the word respect started being shoved down my throat at every turn about… twenty years ago or so.

Respect the professionals; respect the training, respect the uniform, respect the office, respect the teacher’s position; respect the degree; respect the authority, respect… respect… respect…

And to all this I have but one thing to answer: WHY?

It was part of the argument of the blog-invasion by Desperate Teen Brownshirts (an upcoming reality series) “You should respect our teacher because she’s a TEACHER.”  They couldn’t explain to me why this was worthy of respect beyond how that teacher might do her job (or lack of respect beyond how that teacher might do her job.)  Nor could they explain why I should “respect” whatever she did, just because she was in a position of authority over them.  She was not in a position of authority over me and I will match my credentials with hers school room hour by school room hour and books read by books read – without even mentioning capacity for reasoning.  (Like the little worm Heinlein talked about, who bragged of being a brontosaurus on his mother’s side, a teacher who sends half-formed adolescent to defend her from a largely imagined insult by being rude and crude in public might not have anything else to be proud of.)

My children, of course, as soon as they entered school, (and because they’re mine from the top of their little horns to their little hoofkins, which they don’t got) started telling me “you know, when a teacher comes in demanding respect, you know he/she will have nothing – neither knowledge nor ability, nor even a lively teaching style to justify it.”  (This is different from a teacher who displays dignity.  They rather like those – teachers with enough SELF-respect to demand silence in the classroom during class and to teach as though they know more than the students do.  Their second least favorite teacher is “call me Joe.  We’re all friends here.  I’ll learn more from you than you’ll learn from me” idiot.  Interestingly those are also often the ones that flip and start yelling “you have to respect me.”)

But it went beyond that.  The very first cozy I wrote and submitted came back rejected because I had a funny policeman in it.  “You can’t have that,” the rejection said.  “The police are professionals.  You can’t make fun of them.”

I thought this was very odd, having grown up on the Saint and even on Miss Marple and Poirot and … all the others.  I thought “It’s this house.  They’re insane.”  And then I got books on how to write mysteries, and I found that the very FORM was being barred by decree from above.  “Cozies are not real mysteries, and besides they’re unbelievable.  How could an amateur be better than a trained professional?”  This from houses that claim to publish fiction.  At the same time, both written and TV mysteries tried to show policemen as near-infallible professionals who followed on clue upon clue.

Oh, yeah, the other thing, if you disagreed with “scientists” – like the clowns who have for thirty years pushed a lethal food pyramid down our throats – you were “anti-science” because the “scientists are professionals.”  If you disagreed with your doctor, he’d ask you if you had an MD (and they don’t like being told “Well, no.  But I’ve had this here body for almost half a century, and you haven’t.”  And yet, it’s true.)

Suddenly the world was full of experts whose opinion was irrefutable because they were experts.  Listen to the experts, kowtow to the governor.  Kiss the baton.

The oldest civilizations known to men were all that way.  Perhaps it is a way human civilizations go, when we’ve been civilized too long.  Perhaps…

Or perhaps it was the result of an elite who knew they didn’t deserve their lofty positions and were trying to hold on with coordinated razzle dazzle, to change our culture, to make us into what we were not, so they might have power a little longer.  I read somewhere it started with the student revolts in the sixties – that these happened at all the better colleges, and students changed the curriculum and learned near nothing, and then when they move into life all they wanted was respect, so no one questioned the deep dark pit beneath the pretty paper.

I know that I, myself, was taught by post-sixties standards.  All the students who asked that things be thrown out as no longer relevant, like western classics, classic languages, long hours of formal training, extensive reading, modes of deportment, screwed my generation over.  We never got a chance at saying “but we want to learn that.”

Heck, because the immediately previous generation, at least in Portugal, were often our teachers, sometimes we didn’t get the opportunity to learn anything.  I spent an entire year of language arts painting a mural outside the middle school with my class.  (Because it taught us revolutionary… oh, BALLS! Because the teacher was barely literate due to all the “classroom occupations” and “student demands.”)

Were all the people of the generation before mine that way?  Oh, heck no.  Virtue isn’t generational.  But the bad apples did carry the day and make it bad for everyone.  My brother’s classes had so many “student strikes” that one year he almost didn’t have classes.

The rest of us, who weren’t striking or acting like loons could react one of two ways.  I’m not virtuous, either, but I am curious, and have an insatiable need to feed what Heinlein called The Elephant Child (in an allusion to Kipling.)  Oh, yeah, and I like reading.  So I set about to repair a lot of the omissions on my own.  It worked, sort of.  Or it is working.  I have holes in my knowledge, and besides math is a devil to learn on your own.  (However, for all the auto-didacts out there, Great Courses is the way to go.)  A lot of people did that.

A lot of others didn’t.  And going into the workforce – now two generations since the great burning of the mental tools of Western civilization – they were conscious that they could pretend, but the real knowledge wasn’t there.  And then they started talking about “respect.”

This is a simplistic explanation, and it doesn’t cover everything.  There’s also the growing power and scope of bureaucracy, and the desperate need anyone who even aspires to, much less has attained, a position of unwarranted power over other individuals, has – as a sort of reflex of their personality – to have you “respect” their ideas, their opinions, their very existence.

And then there’s those who, through luck, contacts, stealth, or the sheer fact that the people older than them thought they were ‘the future’ took over the commanding heights of art and mass communication and who, once secure, spent their entire time holding the political color line and keeping anything and anyone they disagreed with out.  Oh, and promoting this weird idea of respect for the position and that you had to have credentials to do things which, until recently, you didn’t even have to have formal schooling to do.

They had to know some of the people they were keeping out could outthink them and outcreate their darlings five ways from Monday.  So they created this idea that believing like they did was a sign of intelligence and therefore anyone who believed differently was dumb.  Just another cry for R-E-S-P-E-C-T.

And once the virus of “respect” is in place, we’re asked to respect all sorts of absurd things: symbols, pieces of paper, positions.

Look, I’m not a sans-coulotte, even though at various times when I look at policies being implemented, I’ve been known to mutter that we need more lampposts with arms, so we can hang the aristos from them.  I do respect some forms and some places – those that have a history worthy of respect.  I respect our form of government which sucks, but sucks less than all the others.  I respect the places where our history has been forged and the monuments that symbolize it.  I even respect the constitution of the United States (a work birthed by geniuses who produced it while half-dead of heat stroke in a place with almost no human comforts) to the point of respect extending to the paper it was written in.

But I don’t venerate the paper above the content.  And my respect for the oval office might or might not extend to the man in it – why should it?  A lot of the men in it have not respected the office either as a charge or as a location.

I wonder how it would all have ended without the internet.  (What a marvelous world this is, which has such electrons in it.)  Badly, I suspect.  Hell, it might still end badly.  We’ve now raised what?  Three generations? With this stupid idea of “respect for the position.”

But I don’t think so.  I don’t think so, because the establishment is on the run and the aristos are trying to hide behind walls of “you must respect me.”

I first noticed how the internet discomfited my older colleagues, the vaunted lions of a generation that has yet to produce a world bestriding giant of Asimov’s stamp – let alone Heinlein’s –  when one of them went into a spit-flecked rant about Amazon allowing “just anyone” to review books.  After all what credentials did these “reviewers” have?  Why should they be allowed to voice their opinion?

This was the first time I realized that not only were their amazing reviews in fact controlled by their publishers (yes, most of them WERE paid for) and the prizes they awarded each other hollow of any significance – but they KNEW it.  Meanwhile I, back then, as a completely naive beginner writer, was thrilled every time I got a new review because it meant someone else had read my words, and I treasured the good ones, even the dopey ones that praised characters who weren’t actually in the novel.  And, as a reader, I’d already found that those reviews, once you filtered out the obvious nuts (best exemplified by the buying of things other than books, at Amazon – you know, the review that says “this might be an okay coffee maker, but it doesn’t work at all as a steam shovel, so I’m giving it one star.”), were a much better guide of what I’d like to read than all the “expert” reviews in the world.

Now, of course, with indie publishing, the screaming has got deafening.  “Why are they allowed to publish anything?”  “Publishers are professionals.”

Other mavens of the establishment are going equally unhinged.  The “scientists”, say, whose emails got leaked, and who proved to be far less worthy of respect than the con men of my childhood who deceived the farmers with shell games but who at least were willing to work at it and perfect their crooked trade.  The “Journalists” whining that they can no longer change the national conversation – as though this had ever been part of their job description.  The doctors who sue someone for describing – on his blog – how he lost weight (which incidentally is how my husband lost over 150 lbs and is keeping it off) because it doesn’t accord with their doctrine.  The “businessmen” who apply to the government for subsidies because they’re too big to fail – after proving the only way they can run a business is into the ground.

All of them are screaming “RESPECT ME” at the top of their lungs.  Which is all the proof you need to have that they don’t deserve that respect.

Unearned, office-associated “respect” is something given to priests and shamans, to guardians of a mystery religion.  Respecting the “office” and the trappings of the office is a thing of ancient monarchy.  It is not something that should even be talked about in a free society.

In a free society, we respect those who have earned our respect.  To them I’ll give full measure of respect and brimming over.  Take Ric Locke – he went from wanna be to colleague with one book.  I have other friends and acquaintances who haven’t even had the success he had.  But I’ve read their work, and they’re my colleagues.  They earned it.  They don’t have the position, but they already have my respect.

The others?  The lords of empty pomp and circumstance, hiding behind their credentials?  Don’t make me laugh.

Whether they’re petty teachers demanding pomp and circumstance from their classes, or heads f publishing houses trying to impose their taste and opinion on a tired public* – they don’t deserve and they don’t get my respect.  For them I’ll paraphrase Marlowe: Heyla you pampered jades of the establishment!  We’re coming to get you.

*No.  Of course I DON’T mean Baen.  Baen caters to the public.  And has been called “lowbrow” for it.  And the grace with which they laugh their way to the bank HAS earned my respect. (Grin.)

A Guest Post From Kate Paulk

*Kate writes about acculturation.  I find this post fascinating because some of her experiences are the opposite of mine.  I have found that with the exception of a generation or so, Americans are less worshipful of the external marks of success than other people and more likely to tell people to take authority and shove it.  I wonder if the difference is where Kate comes from, or just the fact that she came here almost twenty years after me, and whether we’ve changed that much in that time.  I’d like to say the TSA is not something I’d have expected us to swallow for more than a few months, in dire emergency.  Perhaps we’re being boiled very slowly.

The only other note on her feeling more Australian the longer she’s here…  I felt like that until I went back to Portugal for three months, about six months in.  And suddenly I felt more American than any American.  This is because the human brain only sees the differences and magnifies them.  Of course, now I am American in a way I was never Portuguese.  You see, I actually believe in the founding principles.  There are still a few of us…*

So, Sarah wants me to guest here, and she’s given me free rein to rant… er, write whatever I want. MWAHAHAHAHAAAAA! (Um, oops. Let the mask slip a bit there).

Anyway, a couple of weeks back I was ranting over at Mad Genius Club about culture and how various things affect it. Kind of sideways, since I was actually saying how there’s no such thing as the Great American Novel, but still, a lot of things go into what a culture looks like and they affect the way people look at things in subtle but important ways. Or, to use the fancy words, culture is where the world-view comes from, and that affects the paradigms a person recognizes.

I make a pretty good illustration of this. I might have been in the USA for going on ten years now, but I’m still thoroughly Australian. I may never be anything but Australian even if/when I eventually take citizenship. It’s not that I don’t like the USA and its principles, it’s more that the more I live here the more I realize how Australian I am in everything except the beer. Hell, despite not ever being much interested in sport, I find American sports incomprehensible, but I’ll cheerfully watch the sports Aussies obsess over.

And one of the regular complaints from Australia is how much the place is being “Americanized”. What I’ll call for the want of a better term mainstream American culture is superficially very similar to mainstream Australian culture. The differences don’t seem to be particularly important – to the extent that when I moved here to get married, I naively expected the USA to be like Australia only better.

Well, no. It’s not. It’s different. Some things are better, some are worse, and some are just plain baffling.

One of the first things that I noticed was how much more Americans generally trust those in authority. To this Aussie, that’s plain weird. Australia got its start as a convict settlement where most of the convicts were petty criminals or political prisoners, and their overseers were the dregs of the British Army. The New South Wales Army Corps was where the British Empire dumped the soldiers who were too much trouble anywhere else – so those convicts in a place that was alien and upside down (they had no idea seasons are reversed in the southern hemisphere, which nearly starved the settlement) were stuck with brutal and incompetent overseers. Their religious guidance such as it was came from the “Flogging Parson” who was notorious for trying to save their souls on Sunday and beat the life out of them the rest of the week.

No surprise, Australians generally have a deep distrust of anyone in authority, and tend to believe that not only does power corrupt and absolute power corrupt absolutely, anyone who seeks power is either already corrupt or highly corruptible. In short, all politicians are lying bastards and so are all bosses, union leaders and other such sorts, and the only way to keep them half-way honest is to stay on them like flies on shit. (I should probably add that Australians typically don’t regard most of the four-letter-word family as swearing. Or a lot of other language that gives Americans the vapors. As for politically correct language, it generally takes less than 24 hours for the current PC-phrase-du-jour to be used as an insult. Australian English is extremely contextual.)

Add to that a country where damn near everything can kill you – Terry Pratchett’s scene in Last Continent where Death starts by asking for a list of dangerous animals and plants in XXXX (Which is actually an Australian brand of beer) and gets buried under books, then asks for a list of non-dangerous critters and gets a single piece of paper with the line “Some of the sheep” isn’t really exaggerating. Much – and where the main driver of little things like rainfall is the temperature of the South Pacific Ocean miles away (you know, the thing that drives whether there’s going to be El Nino, La Nina or something indeterminate) and you get a country where people shake their shoes and clothes out before putting them on and assume that anything good is transient and to be enjoyed while it lasts.

It’s built a culture of work hard, do it once, right, then go relax and have a beer. Also a culture that regards failure and misfortune as inevitable because everything really is out to get you. You can do everything right and still get screwed by Australia. But it’s still the best bloody place on Earth, mate, and God help anyone who tries to say otherwise, because Aussies won’t.

You’ll hear people claim that Australians are racist. They’re not. They just sound racist because all the originally racist words end up becoming terms of affection. Or just outright descriptive. An Aussie is not being racist when talking about going to “the chink restaurant up the road”. That Aussie is probably friendly with the people running the restaurant, and has kids who play with the restaurant owners kids regularly. It’s just that “chink” is shorter than “chinese”, and it’s become a generic nickname. All Australians typically care about is whether someone works at what they do, and keeps trying even when the sky opens and the brown stuff falls.

Because one thing Australians do know is that success and failure both have a hell of a lot of luck attached.

From what I’ve seen the USA completely missed the luck factor. The founding mythos isn’t one of injustice from the Powers That Be, but one of religious people ultimately finding the promised land. On top of that, the USA got a truly astonishing collection of intellects in the founders of the nation, which led to the notion that the people in charge were there because they actually deserved to be there.

This poor Aussie very nearly ended up picking up pieces of exploded brain over that one.

American heroes tend to be shot down and discarded as soon as they show any kind of flaw, which is equally mystifying to Aussies. Aussie heroes are the ones who keep at it despite what happens, and despite – sometimes because of – their flaws. The people who get torn to pieces are the ones who make the mistake of trying to claim they’re better than anyone else. The way to be a popular success in Australia is the combination of “I worked hard and I got lucky.”

But then, Americans did get the promised land, in a way. Americans went west and found endless plains of arable land, reasonably predictable seasons, and weather that while harsher than European weather was liveable. Australians found desert. Lots of desert. And floods that covered half the continent with water before disappearing and going back to desert again. Americans found California. Australians found desert that turned into beach. Shark infested beach, at that. Americans got corn. Australians got the most toxic snake in the world.

So Americans had mostly a land that told them if they worked hard they’d succeed. Australians had one that told them they could do everything right and the land would still break them. End result, Americans expect success, where Australians keep an eye out for trouble and don’t trust a bloody thing. The American success story is certain he got there entirely because of his hard work, where the Australian success story is pretty sure the bloke beside him who worked just as hard and failed was unlucky where he got lucky – and tries never to forget that luck changes. (Yes, Australians are inveterate gamblers. So much so that the Australian Tax Office does not classify winnings from gambling as income. It’s a windfall and not taxable.)

Most of all of this was completely invisible to me, until I started living here. You don’t see the world view of your culture until you live in another culture. It’s just “normal”.

Which of course means that writing a culture that’s radically different from your own is an interesting challenge. This would be why not many authors can do it. And why being able to do it is important. Aside from anything else, someone who can get inside the mindset of a different culture can also look at their own culture from that other perspective and see the blind spots.

Not everything is perfect, and the USA has its share of flaws. There’s a difference between acknowledging the flaws and wanting to improve them, and thinking that because it’s not perfect it must be evil (a peculiarly American issue, as far as I can tell). I’m all for the former, but anyone who tries to pull the latter on me is in for some choice Kate-bitchiness.

I should add that the same applies at the every level: personal, family, locality… all the way up the scale. From my perspective the best thing Human Wave offers is the ability to acknowledge the flaws without presuming everything flawed must be evil.

And now if you’ll excuse me, I have Evil Overlording to do.

Studying War

The Twentieth Century was a profoundly weird century.  No.  Seriously.

I was thinking about this as I was exercising.  Currently my exercise video (have to, or I get bored and wander off) is Amazon streaming video, mystery series Foyle’s War mysteries set during WWII.

It’s funny because I never considered WWII history.  History was stuff in the eighteenth century.  WWII was part of my parents’ childhood memories.  (Yes, Portugal was neutral.  But they took in refugees and supplied food to both sides – you would too if you had a much bigger Axis country next door ready to whomp you if you sided with the allies, and, otoh, you were Britain’s oldest alliance and therefore couldn’t turn your back on them.  At any rate, considering what Portugal contributed to the effort in WWI [barefoot, unarmed soldiers.  I was reading a book about WWI and when they described the Germans attacking and the Portuguese stealing the messengers bicycles and pedaling away, I almost lost it.  It was one of those laughing through tears moments.  I grew up with stories of those poor boys sent to die at the pleasure of a government who wanted to look good and be part of the allied force, even though the country was bankrupt.  Some of them returned.  I don’t know if they returned because they stole bicycles and pedaled home and I wouldn’t hold it against them if they had.] ) Portugal had food rationing and whenever our rulers at the time thought they might have upset the axis, people went about taping the windows, in case of raids.

This as well as the regimes blinkered ideas of economics – were they Fascist?  Well… not exactly.  To a certain extent, they ruled as FDR would have unimpaired by the constitution.  But let’s face it that was as close as no separation to national socialism. It was still socialism, crossed with crony capitalism.  Cradle to grave plus your buddies got all the plum financing for public works, etc.  In their defense, they did better than the previous anarchist sympathizers.  In their non-defense, crony capitalism and economic dirigism will only take you so far. – Meant that my parents, one of whom at least was solidly middle class and probably for the time upper middle class (the extended family, at least, was) grew up knowing hunger and also such contrivances as gleaning and walking the rail line for fallen coal pieces, to keep body and soul together.

What I mean is that this was not, truly, in the end, exactly history, but stuff mom and dad had lived through and talked about, plus stuff that movies were made of.  I despaired ever writing a romance because I didn’t know nearly enough about WWII, and that’s when all romances were set.

And the Napoleonic invasions?  Well, grandma had heard of them from her grandma, so it wasn’t exactly history either.

Anyway, now that we’re nearing the anniversary of WWI, I find myself looking back at the twentieth century and thinking it was a very odd time and it has colored the way we think of things like… What causes war and what constitutes acceptable war and what our motives should be in going to war…  In a way it is probably responsible for the “Hate our side first” crowd.

I think the problem was mass media.  Well, not the problem exactly, but what made the twentieth century such a bizarre time.  If that was the case, it is entirely possible that the new media will take us back, instead, to a time where war and conflict and all are seen as what they were to begin with: a striving of tribes in defense or securing of their self interest.

I’m not making much sense, am I?  Blame it on one cup of tea and one diet coke.  Not nearly enough caffeine.

Look, humanity has always more or less been at war.  Yes, I know fantasy books, and some of the history books that resemble fantasy talk about times of peace.  But mostly peace was either localized or known only in the default.  Every religion prayed for peace because what there was, in fact, was war.

I’m not going to moralize about this.  The people who went on about how humans were particularly bad because of this, never apparently really looked at other species, from the starling to the chimp.  We strive because we’re alive, and sometimes that which we strive against is, perforce, our own species.  In a way, it is perhaps part of how we’ve tamed ourselves, because the only way to ultimately stop a really bad behavior of a group is to stop the group.

The oldest burials of our kind are chiefs with their war maces, which were sometimes ornamental (the kings were sometimes children, too) but were indisputably, a sign of power because the mace serves to hit enemies on the head, and if you can hit enough people on the head, there, you have power.  Even what appears to be peaceful agrarian villages were regularly raided by hunter-gatherers, when times got lean.  As for Celts, for all their admirable poetry and other achievements, let’s face it, they were glorified cattle robbers and headhunters.

It’s not a choice whether you’re descended from thieves, raiders and cannibals, only WHICH thieves, raiders and cannibals you are descended from and how successful they were.

Of course, these things changed.  Wars continued, but as we got wealthier as a species, as we changed more areas to be good for our habitation, there started to be pockets of peace.  Even in the middle ages, these pockets might be temporary, as Summer was war time, but there was a chance the army would take another route and your village would be left unraided.  Some lucky places could go generations without being raided.  (Okay, they were normally dirt-poor places, but all the same.)

Grow up in a place where humans have lived long enough and it’s not unusual for a farmer to turn over a box – or a jug, or even an amphora – with his plow and discover within a few coins or a couple of pieces of jewelry.  People had the thing down to a science: hear an army is approaching, bury your treasures where no one will know.  Of course, get killed and no one ever knows and it’s left for centuries or millennia, scars and mute witness to past conflicts.

With the industrial age and the professionalization of armies, we got yet another distancing of the conflict.  Places might be at war more or less continuously, but unless the army came to your region, the war was something you heard about or read about in the newspapers.

And the myth of peace spread.  The idea that peace was the normal condition of mankind.  It also spread a type of mentality in which war and making war was unconditionally bad, and therefore had to be justified with high moral words.

I’m not saying there was never demonization of the other side before.  Of course there was.  The number of Portuguese Proverbs that say something bad about Spaniards is roughly equal to the number of Portuguese Proverbs that mention Spaniards.  But beneath it, everyone pretty much knew it was your tribe fighting with the other tribe who wanted to take your land or stuff, or you wanted to take theirs.  You didn’t need to think – and didn’t think – the other tribe was terrible ideologically and would destroy the world if they won.  You just knew they would take yours stuff.

World War One was the first war in which the enemy was made a threat to the world, not just to the countries it wishes to invade.  Raped Belgian nuns and all, the war was in the end just a continuation of European nation-state wars, and yet it was blown up to a world conflict.  And from it came World War Two.

To be honest, at the same time, we’d got some strange brain worms, like communism, which was a world threat because it was “universal” in nature.  Not that communism was anything new.  In its scope it was exactly like the invading/expanding Islam of the seventh century: a militant faith, with universal aspirations, which believed conversion at sword point was valid.  But because communism (in a way the opposite of Islam which dressed its political/economic system in ideas of religion and morality) was a religious faith pretending to be an economic and political system, it penetrated in insidious ways, and claimed its prescriptions for how to live were “scientific.”

Which meant they had to be fought as a threatening would-be world-devouring ideology, because they WOULD be that, if they could.  And that muddied things further.

What I mean is that we’ve got to the point of thinking the only thing worth fighting for is ideas.  And then we have people in our own government who think the only moral war is that in which we have no interest whatsoever.  Which is sort of putting things upside down, because if we have nothing to gain or lose, than our behavior is not bound by any rational goals.  How do you “win” when you have nothing to win from this war.  When you establish democracy?  How do you measure democracy?  And how does it affect you?  Does anyone care if we’re creating worse messes for ourselves by arbitrarily quitting wars?

It also creates some very weird ideas of what war IS.  Those who believe that the US are war mongers, for instance, think we could stop wars by simply stopping.  They seem to think that the rest of the world are angels, with full fledged wings.  Terry Pratchett himself – genuflect – got the really odd idea that if a very wealthy place is unprotected, then no one will attack it.  This is somewhat more than insane, because just because we’ve been brain washed into believing only in “War for higher purpose” it doesn’t mean everyone has been and as the world turns into a time to pay the piper for years and wealth squandered trying to create paradise on Earth, any rich country will be a big fat target.

Yes, Ronald Reagan outspent the Soviets and let Capitalism defeat them.  But he didn’t do so by laying down weapons.  On the contrary.

The whole way the historians paint the two world wars as having come from German militarism is putting the cart before the horse.  Germany didn’t get all militaristic and then automagically the war started.  The war started because the expanding German industry and population needed resources and access to a warm sea port.  The militarism, pretty uniforms and arming up was simply a reaction to that.

When we pin our ideas of what war is and one gets to war on the externalization, the “feeling” of it, and the idea that all we need to do to stop war from affecting us is be really peaceful, we are making ourselves what is known in the bad neighborhoods (and the world is always a bad neighborhood) as an easy target.

The Bible can talk of studying war no more, but that’s after a miracle occurs and we’re no longer humans as we know them.  For now, being humans as we are, the best we can hope is that war doesn’t hit our particular neck of the woods.  And that means, particularly if we’re a wealthy land, going well armed and talking tough enough that the bad actors fear us.

Winning hearts and minds is all very well – but that usually – for humans – happens after the body carrying the mind and heart around has been pounded into the ground.  It’s who we are.  We’re a striving species, every man against his brother.  It’s what kept us alive.

Forget that and we’re gone.  The future belongs to those willing to fight for it.

Shameless Pimping Of Words

First self pimping — hey, it’s my blog — the Earc of Darkship Renegades is up.

Then, from Edward Willet: here are the two YA novels I’ve just released. If you think they’re worth a mention, great! And if not, that’s OK, too.

The Chosen is out in Kindle (and paperback through CreateSpace) at http://www.amazon.com/The-Chosen-ebook/dp/B007NSS0M2/. Here’s the blurb:

In a ruined future, two teenagers, one a girl from a religious cult determined to stop the rebuilding of a technological society whose destruction they believe was punishment from God, one a boy from a group just as determined to rebuild the old high-tech world, must overcome their differences to work together to stop the first war of the new age–a war that might destroy both their peoples.

The Haunted Horn is currently only in Kindle format, at http://www.amazon.com/The-Haunted-Horn-ebook/dp/B008N2VDXK/. The blurb:

Alex Mitchell doesn’t have the slightest interest in the auction his mother drags him to after a disastrous day at junior high. Antiques are her interest, not his—yet somehow, when they head home, he’s the one clutching a Civil War bugle. When Alex blows the horn, he sets in motion a train of events that will destroy his home town of Oak Bluff, Arkansas…unless he can figure out the secret of the haunted horn in time, and, with the help of his new friend Annie Parker, evade the gang of bullies out to get him, her, and the haunted horn.

Edward Willett
edwardwillett.com
My latest adult novel: Magebane (written as Lee Arthur Chane, DAW Books); “Spectacular” – Publishers Weekly (starred review)
Shortlisted for the Regina Book Award, 2011 Saskatchewan Book Awards

From Travis Leteer:

Texarkana Ranger, Travis Letteer
http://www.amazon.com/Texarkana-Ranger-ebook/dp/B008FEP7BA/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1345348394&sr=1-1&keywords=Texarkana+Ranger

He also promotes Sabrina Chase:  I’ll go ahead and throw in a plug here for Sabrina Chase’s work. For those of you who like Elizabeth Moon or David Weber’s Honor Harrington series; I highly recommend Sabrina’s Sequoyah books. (linked in the post above)

And Update from Ms. Chase herself:  For those wary of incomplete series I am happy to announce the final book of the Sequoyah trilogy is now available at Amazon http://bit.ly/Rx7xP8 and Barnes & Noble. http://bit.ly/Rx7ItH

And from Deb Kinnard:

My next book, PEACEWEAVER, a romance set in 973 Wales (a setting that would never, never sell, according to my ex-agent) releases in print and e- on 9/21.

And from Pat Chiles, whose book he was so kind as to send me and which I will read and review just as soon as life stops hitting me with the  crisis stick:

Ooh! Ooh! My turn!
Sarah already knows this ‘un, but if anyone else has a hankering for a technothriller about spaceflight set in the very near future, check out PERIGEE:

Kindle: http://www.amazon.com/Perigee-ebook/dp/B006PNL48I/
Kobo: http://www.kobobooks.com/ebook/Perigee/book-arvm5BCglEu0IUJpggEV3w/page1.html?s=uuGGTo2XdUWTOjh41ZzjOQ&r=1
Nook: http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/perigee-patrick-chiles/1108066767?ean=2940013779778
Smashwords: https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/206620

And from Larry Atchley

stories published recently and upcoming I have the following:
“Ragnarok & Roll” in the shared world anthology Rogues in Hell, of the Heroes in Hell series created by Janet Morris was recently published in July this year. Available from Amazon for Kindle EBook http://www.amazon.com/Rogues-Hell-Heroes-ebook/dp/B008JZCFMO/ref=tmm_kin_title_0?ie=UTF8&qid=1346521272&sr=8-1 and trade paperback:  http://www.amazon.com/Rogues-Hell-Janet-Morris/dp/0985166878/ref=tmm_pap_title_0?ie=UTF8&qid=1346521272&sr=8-1
To be published sometime around Halloween, October 2012 will be my story “The Shadow of a Doubt” in the horror anthology What Scares the Boogeyman, created by John Manning.
And to be published sometime in late Fall/Winter 2012 is my story “Time for a Change” in the shared world anthology Sha’Daa Pawns, created by Michael H. Hanson and edited by Ed McKeown. The website for the Sha’Daa series: http://www.shadaa.com/ShaDaa/Home.html
Also scheduled to publish in Winter 2012 my poem “The Shadow People” will be included in the poetry collection, A Book of Night, created and complied by Richard Groller. This collection will include poems written by both contemporary and classical poets and will feature original artwork by contemporary artisits within the book to accompany some of the verses.
I was recently inducted into the writers club The Fictioneers. Here is their website:  http://www.thefictioneers.com/Fictioneers/Home.html
Pimp your own upcoming works on the comments to this post, and they shall go up next weekend, whenever I bestir myself out of the WIP.

Let RES Speak!

 

*I will do my post on what ya’ll have been up to later today.  Meanwhile, with a remarkable lack of punny stuff, RES sent me a guest post which I’m proud to put up, it being remarkably more lucid than the stuff I normally grind out.  RES admits to being a corporate accountant and a long time science-fiction reader, but claims to be innocent of any wish to write the stuff.  Well!  Having tempted him into blog post I consider myself happy, if not satisfied.  As you all know my evil insidiousness is never satisfied and never sleeps.*

It Used To Be Better
by RES
Once upon a time, long, long ago, giants strode the Earth.  Our ancestors built towering palaces, did great deeds, mastered arcane mysteries whose secrets are today lost.  Or so most Fantasy tells us.

A past Golden Age is a common theme in Fantasy, an earlier time when things were better.  And of course our modern age is a fallen one, deteriorating every day and twice on Sunday.  Tolkein’s is a fallen world, as is Conan’s (although perhaps from not so great a height.)  The tale of Camelot is a story of glory lost, and its promised return.  Harry Potter’s world has slipped from past glories, with no one to match Merlin or the Hogwarts Founders.  Even in SF we find the theme of lost knowledge ~ what is the theme of McCaffrey’s <I>Dragonflight</I> if not discovery of <I>lost</I> and rediscovered knowledge?

Nations, tribes, clans almost always trace their origins back to a near-mythical demi-god founder.  Ancient Egypt thought its pharaohs deities, as have the Chinese and Japanese peoples.  England’s King Arthur is matched in Charlemagne and Frederick Barbarossa in France and Germany.  Founding myths commonly trace a present culture to an older, greater one, such as Rome’s establishment by refugees from fallen Troy.

There are many reasons this theme captures our imagination; prominent among them is that it reflects our own psychological progression.  Thus there is a comfort to the idea we inhabit a diminished culture.

In childhood we lack understanding of the complex world into which we have entered.  As we grow, idealizing our parents is a fundamental stage in our development.  We begin ignorant of our world, lacking knowledge and skills required to survive.  We depend on our parents for all our needs, including especially understanding of the world.

Our parents, our teachers, our mentors all seem to possess great knowledge.  They read books which baffle us.  They perform mathematical calculations incomprehensible to us.  They with ease do myriad things which we struggle to accomplish, from drawing a picture to making music to assembling a jigsaw puzzle.  Over time we master many of these skills and in the mastering disparage them.  Hurdles nigh insurmountable to us as children are miniscule in hindsight.

We learn, too, that our childhood heroes have clay feet, will often disappoint us as we observe them in everyday life.  In adolescence we vent our disillusionment, resent those people and institutions for being less than we thought them.  Eventually we become cynical, declaring “they’re all rotten.”  Idols from the perspective of childhood are all too clearly flawed when we meet them as near equals.  The disappointment we feel for their being less than we imagined, for being merely human, causes a letdown, however unfairly.

The young observe the world with large eyes, wide open and wondering.  Eventually we squint at it through narrowed gaze.  We still hold onto our childhood dreams, however, and imagine that the world which we entered was better than the one we inhabit.

We never quite shake childhood expectations; our emotions yet yearn for the comforts we knew.  As children our experience with the mail is that it brings us positive things: birthday and holiday cards, often with checks or small cash gifts.  I recall looking at adulthood with anticipation of all the mail I would receive, never realizing that the bulk of that mail would be asking for money, not granting it to me.  But I still receive every day’s post with hopeful anticipation, even as opening it engenders small disappointments.

We similarly are forgetful — or ignorant — of the downsides of times past.  The romance of Western cowboys, Victorian highwaymen and French musketeers is not diminished by actual experience of the pleasures of a day spent in saddle, thighs chafed and spine rattled.  Nor do we consider the pungent odour of the horses’ manure, nor their sweat nor the work required to feed and curry them.  Children may yearn for ponies but seldom do they contemplate the work required by their keep.

Just so do we look back on prior ages as superior to our own.  We forget (or never learn) the flaws of their leaders, seeing mainly their accomplishments.  Achievements make up the histories while the compromises and abuses required to attain them get forgotten.  We see our modern era as flawed because we are too close; we view past generations as more heroic because we look not closely at their realities.  Village life is romanticized, imagining everybody caring one for another and we declare “It takes a village” mostly because we either never lived in a village or, more probably, have forgotten the pleasures of having everybody in the village watching you and reporting your misdeeds to your parents.

We reflect on childhood with fondness and forgetfulness, recalling joys and sorrows vaster than our present experiences because we had not yet grown inured.  Triumphs were sweeter for being newer and unexpected; the pleasure of every additional triumph growing slighter as they accumulate and come to be expected.  The first time you achieve something is glorious, each successive time rather less so.  We look at our present times and notice that the golden sheen of everyday has gotten tired and dingy.

Our personal development is reflected in our view of the world.  We remember our personal pasts and our cultural pasts as rosier, as better, and our present as less admirable, less desirable.  A longing for a better cultural past is an expression of our longing for a more attractive personal past, a time when the world seemed more secure and glorious, a time before we learned of the flaws of the world.

We take modern marvels for granted for having become commonplace.  Soaps are expected to be scented and gentle, not harsh and abrasive.  We expect our electricity and our internet connections to be reliable, our foods to be safe, our kitchens free of vermin.  We expect our effluvium to be swiftly flushed away, not sit in a chamber pot to be dumped in the privy.  We forget the tedium of few television channels, of slow internet connections but we remember the marvel and excitement of watching cartoons every Saturday morning, of being able to connect to others online who shared interests like our own.  The glamour through which we viewed the world fades, but its memory and its allure remain.  Even though we have figured out many of the tricks, we remember the wonder and magic that enthralled us.

Jim Baen reportedly observed that the Golden Age of Science Fiction is fourteen — because that’s usually our age when we discover the genre.  And upon that discovery we not only lacked the critical capacity to evaluate what we were discovering, we likely read much of the best the field has produced.  Librarians and friends more versed in the genre point us toward Heinlein, Asimov, Clarke, Sturgeon and others whose works have stood the test of time and the judgement of more critical readers.  As we delve further into the genre we discover lesser authors, often deservedly forgotten.  Our sense of wonder diminishes both from diminished quality and diminished novelty.

Science Fiction has long taken a positive view, looking at the growth we have known, seeing how we can improve our lives and our world.  Human Wave SF reminds us that we can make the world better.  There will be costs, but the results are worth it.  Human Wave SF calls for progress, for making a better rather tomorrow rather than pining for a falsely idealized yesterday.  It encourages because it inverts the normal aging process, by promising us that the future is brighter if we want it to be, tantalizing us with youthful novelty regained.

 

Pygmalion my Frankenstein, Pleaded The Writer

One of the commenters asked about making characters come to life, how to make them more than helpful constructions who hit your plot points.

Objectively I should be the last person in the world to explain how to do that, because, well, for the first … eight novels I wrote, I didn’t know there was any other way to start than with “the character is here and wants me to tell his story.”  Characters came, and still come, to me fully formed.  I don’t sit around thinking “what are his strengths and weaknesses?  Why does he do that weird thing with his napkin?

No, I don’t know every detail about the character when he first shows up.  Usually to be honest all I know about the character is that he or she is in pain and motivated to do something to end the pain.  Sometimes the pain is emotional, sometimes physical.  And sometimes the pain might not be obvious on first meeting them.  And some characters, their pain might even evade the reader altogether – say Dyce Dare in the refinishing mysteries – but what seems to first attract me to the character is their pain.  I’ll see in which way they’re broken.

Of course, when I was young and stupid, I didn’t know the difference between pain that leads a character to move and fight and pain that results in the character just wanting to die, and not in a blaze of glory.  This resulted in two painful novels where the character just moaned about how unfortunate he was.

(I didn’t know at the time that if I’d just used slightly higher vocabulary and not made it heroic fantasy I could SO totally have got all sorts of literary prizes.  Maybe that’s a good thing.  It would have corrupted me and I’d never have learned to write properly.)

Anyway, those were the eight first novels, a couple now published, but mostly written only when the character imposed on my psyche with enough force to make me write.  I mean, it’s not like someone was paying me for it.

And then I sold a book on proposal.  I won’t say that no characters ever came to life in the Shakespeare trilogy.  Quicksilver eventually acquired a life of his/her own, and the others too eventually came lurching to reluctant life.

BUT not to start with.  To start with they were concepts on the page.  I needed Shakespeare.  I needed a gender changing elf who is both the fair youth and the dark lady.  I needed a wicked king, etc.

They were in fact constructs that would do what I wanted them to.  So… how did they come to life?  Well… I had to think about it.  “This is the character, and I need him to behave this and this and that way.”  And then I tried to visualize the person who would do that.

At this stage, I know because I lurk when other writers discuss their process, many people will “interview” their characters.  I have no objection to doing that, except that it’s like research.  It’s easy to get lost in it, and it unleashes a flood of information that might or might not be relevant to the story.  Also, if the character comes alive in the middle of the interview, it becomes way too tempting to sit there and continue it, because then it’s fun.

But it is possible to do a logical back reasoning from ‘he needs to be unfeeling’ to the toughness that was required for him to survive his childhood, say.  And somewhere there, in the middle of writing the book, you’ll hit something – a flash of childhood memory, something like that – and suddenly the character comes to life.

Actually, even me, starting from the character out, I often find I’m “held out” of the character till I write something that suddenly lets me see into them.  See, even when you get your characters for free, getting to know them is like getting to know your friends.  You need to rub together a little and see them in all sorts of situations.  And no character or person in his right mind comes up to a total stranger and says “hi there, I’m a right bastard because my mom beat me with a wooden spoon when I was three, until the spoon broke.”  NO ONE TALKS LIKE THAT.  But if you’re writing the story, you’ll suddenly get it.  And also that the mother beat him because he was playing in a place where the enemy could see him and thus discover the hideout of the remaining refugees of the half-killed race.  And she was afraid for her, for him, and for all their relatives.  And eventually he GOT that, so he can’t even resent her.  And now his being a right bastard makes sense, and he’s alive to you, just as a friend would be.

There’s another method some authors use which I didn’t even know about until I tried to collaborate with an established writer and he told me “Who is this character based on?  Do I know him?”  And then I found out this author writes everyone based on friends, acquaintances or public figures.  This is how he makes them come alive.  They come alive because he knows them.  He just slots the right person to the right goal, much like interviewing actors, I imagine.

I can’t FATHOM working like that.  I do have the occasional tuckerization, but it’s not like that, and it’s usually a secondary character into whose head I don’t get.

But it clearly works for him, since he’s a bestseller.  You might need to work that way.

There are ways to jog a recalcitrant character, too, one that is almost there but “hiding” – going to the sort of place the character might hang out in and soaking up the atmosphere, for instance, or looking through magazines (hairstyling mags are good for this) until you see a face that you go “That’s him!”  Or “That’s what she looks like!”  Or even finding the right name by looking through baby name books.  Or trying to picture the character’s daily routine.

Something will catch fire, and the character lives.

What if it never happens?  What if you write the book and you still think the character is a construct?

Don’t despair.  First, it happens to all of us – particularly in the old model of publishing which forced us to write from proposal and on demand.  Do enough books and eventually you’ll hit that point, eventually.  One character or another just won’t live for you.

And you know what?  It’s okay.  Just like with writing when you’re inspired and writing when you’re not, it doesn’t seem to mater, if you know enough craft.  Know enough craft and you can fake it.  The character will still not live for you – but he/she will live for the reader.  Trust me.

Sometimes when reading the book later – this just happened with one of my “rejects” then the character comes alive for YOU as a reader.  So it is there.  You just, for some reason can’t see it, at that time.

And that’s the ultimate ingredient for the character to come to life.

Look, whether you make up your characters wholesale, like Pygmalion sculpting Galatea, or you assemble them from spare pieces of your friends, like Frankenstein, in the end you need an extra touch to make it all come to life.

For Pygmalion that was the touch of the goddess.  For us writers, it is the reader.  If the character moves, breathes and becomes real in the reader’s mind – if the reader can think about him/her only as a friend, someone real, then we’ve done our job, no matter how we did it.

We’ve stolen the fire of the gods yet again.

Witchfinder, Free Novel, Chapter 54

*This is the Fantasy novel I’m posting here for free, one chapter every Friday.   If your conscience troubles you getting something for free, do hit the donate button on the right side.  Anyone donating more than $6 will get a non-drm electronic copy of Witchfinder in its final version, when it’s published.
There is a compilation of previous chapters here  all in one big lump, which makes it easier to read and I will compile each new chapter there, a week after I post.  When the novel is completed and about to be edited the compilation page will probably be deleted.

Oh, this is in pre-arc format, meaning you’ll find the occasional spelling mistake and sentence that makes no sense.  It’s not exactly first draft, but it’s not at the level I’d send to a publisher, yet. *

 

Sugar And Spice

Nell was not stupid – or at least she thought to herself, she tried not to be more stupid than she needed to be.  And right then, she thought, it meant not going into those marble halls of fairyland unarmed.  So she reached blindly and found the neck of the bottle that had been labeled “drink me.”  Given that it was not the best of weapons.  She should have brought a hunting knife or even a gun, though if her studying of magic in Avalon meant anything, depending on what spells were on this place, guns might have behaved very oddly.

*Well,* she told herself. *Never mind that.  Everything can be a weapon.  After all, I can use this bottle to bean people on the head.  And besides, there is a very good chance if someone annoys me enough I can grab him and make him drink this.  There is a good chance whatever is in here is as good as that apple.*

She blinked at the liquid, ruby-red and sparkling unnaturally, then walked into the marble hall.  From inside it came the whir of machinery and she thought how odd it was that there would be machinery in fairyland.  Then closer, she heard as if the sound of many voices, all talking at once.

That was fine.  She would find the voices.  And she would figure out what they were doing, and what was happening with the Darkwaters, too.  Suppressing a thought about what might be happening to one Darkwater, and what it might mean that her heart clenched at the thought of his being in trouble, she walked down the marble hall, thinking that it sparkled very oddly indeed.  Marble and magic?  It made an odd sound underfoot, too, as though she were walking on fresh ice on a winter morning at the farm.

Cautiously, wearily she turned a corner… and blinked again, as her eyes adjusted to the impossible.

The corridor stretched on, white and sparkling, and that was not the shocking thing.  What was shocking was that to her right there was a door, and standing in front of the door – on either side – were clockwork soldiers.

They looked like something out of a Christmas play, all red uniforms and round faces painted with very red cheeks and large, black eyes.  Their tall helmets were adorned with plumes.  They held golden lances.  And they were clearly, unmistakably tin, and had large wind-up keys sticking out of their backs.

As she took a step towards them, they both turned to stare at her and Nell’s hair rose up at the back of her neck. It was their eyes.  Painted eyes which were little more than black dots, should not be alive, nor should they follow one’s movements.  And they shouldn’t have a sort of dreadful, intent expression.

She lifted her arm, pulling the bottle back, then let fly.  It hit the helmet of the nearer tin man, then fell.  It hit the wall and shattered, and liquid ran out, eating at the marble floor.  The tin men advanced towards her.  And now she didn’t have a weapon.

And then she thought that food of fairykind was corrosive and possibly lethal to humans, then wouldn’t it…

She eased the backpack strap off her left shoulder, let the backpack swing forward, all the while stepping back out of the risk of the tin men golden lances.  Without looking, she reached in, felt for the boxes of crackers, tore one open, got two crackers, maneuvered the back pack onto both shoulders again.  Then she held a cracker in each hand and ran.

The tin men started to swing the lances, but, of course, the problem of a tin man with clockwork innards is that they wouldn’t react that fast, would they?

So they were taken completely by surprise as she shoved a cracker into each of their gaping tin-cut mouths…  And ran past towards the door they were guarding.  She wasn’t even sure what would be behind that door, or why she should want to go there.  But she knew for an absolute fact that she wanted to get past the tin men, and the door gave her something to interpose between her and those shiny golden lances.

She was barely aware of a sound of tinkle and whirr behind her, and then of tin objects falling – heavily.  She didn’t turn.

To her surprise, the door opened when she pulled on the handle, and she stepped into…

It looked like a Victorian scientist’s mad dream.  She had seen something like this in much smaller scale in the Darkwater’s country residence.  The place where the young Michael worked.

Here, it was bigger, and filled with more tin creatures.  They ran huge complicated machines, they sawed glimmering sheets of copper in half, they ran here and there carrying buckets of stuff.

In the middle of all of it, like a maestro conducting a complicated symphony, stood…  She saw him from the back and swallowed, and opened her mouth to say “Seraphim!” before she realized that while the dark curls were the same and the general proportions similar, this person was smaller – smaller even than Gabriel Penn who resembled the duke in everything but size and height.

The word died on her lips, but she must have made some sound, because the young man turned around.  He did look like Seraphim, but she now perceived he must be the same age as Seraphim’s sister.  He was as yet beardless, his skin pale and clear like his sister’s.  And his green eyes, so much a Darkwater trait, sparkled from beneath goggles of beaten copper and strangely sparkling glass.

He looked at her, his eyes wide open.  “Who are you?” he asked.  “And what are you doing here.”

And then she realized it wasn’t just the glass that sparkled.  His eyes were wide but empty, seeing but unseeing.  They could see her, and yet they didn’t, and she realized she would not be able to reason with him.

The realization came just in time, as his eyebrows drew together abroad his patrician nose, and he said, “You’re not supposed to be here.  There were guards.”  He frowned towards the open door, then looked at the people around him – no, the tin men around him, and lifted a hand.

Before he said anything, she knew he was going to order them to seize her.  Also, she could see, around him the netting of strong magic, and she knew the personality that had formed it.  She also knew that though she might have powerful magic, she couldn’t dent the magic of the king of fairyland.  She could control simple minds under his power, but not the mind of a fully reasoning and seemingly smart young man.

Then she thought this was a trap, like the Alice in Wonderland room.  If she played by the rules, she would lose.  The food of fairyland…  Okay.  This was the equivalent, likely, of throwing the apple in that room.  Before Michael Ainsling could order her seized, she remembered that people under spells were by nature slow and gullible.  She said, aloud, “Wait.  I came to bring you a message.  Let me see…”

She swung the backpack from her shoulder, got a bottle of water from inside, and, before the young man could react to the strangeness of the packaging, pushed it at him, cap removed.  “Drink.”

He hesitated for a moment, and she thought that he was going to order his tin people to catch her.  But his mouth was open, and he was holding the bottle.  It was possible she couldn’t do anything, but she had to try.  Reaching out, she grabbed his wrist, and shoved the bottle towards his face.  Water splashed on him, a great deal of it bathing his face, but some must have gone into his mouth, because he screamed and lifted his hands to wipe at his face, and the threads of the golden spell-net around him snapped.

“Why did you do that?” he asked.  “What are you–”

The bottle had fallen at their feet and the water was gurgling out, corroding the marble.  Michael looked at her, his eyes awake and intent for once.   “You–” he said, and blinked.  “Who are you?”

And then, with a startled look around “And where am I?”

Nell opened her mouth but never spoke.  The ground behind her was crackling like egg shells, the tin people were converging towards them, and, suddenly, from the ceiling above, something fell.  No.  Someone.  No.  Several someones.  She had the impression of three people, two male one female, all dark haired.  They fell between Nell and Michael.  The ground gave way beneath them, and suddenly they were all falling, all of them, towards a darkness punctuated with pinpoints of stars.

Suddenly, as suddenly as they’d fallen, they stopped.  It took a moment for Nell to realize they’d fallen on a black, huge, open net, and that the net was gathering at the top, like a sack closing.  As this brought her in contact with the other prisoners: Miss Ainsling, Michael, Mr. Pen, and a young man dressed like an ancient Greek, it occurred to her, to look up, to where the marble floor appeared corroded as well as fractured.  Light from above shone through it too.  The sound of crackling under her feet came back to her mind and she said, “Sugar.”

“Oh, no,” Mr. Penn said.  “I think it’s quite all right to say shit in these circumstances, your highness.”

“No, I mean the floor is made of sugar.”

“Ah,” he said, his brow creasing.  “Yes.  My uncle is… whimsical.  He derives–” Deep breath.  “A great deal of power from the dreams of childhood.”

And at that moment, as though on cue, the sickly-sweet, threatening voice came out of the big void beneath them, “By the rules, I had to let your find your brother, Miss Ainsling.  I didn’t say I had to let any of you go.”

Scattered Writer With Chances of Sense

I was talking to someone yesterday on the concept of non-fiction cannibalizing fiction.

Banish the gruesome image from your mind.  Despite my late, great argument with THE non-fiction writer who shall not be named, she didn’t try to take a bite out of me.  (She wouldn’t have a chance.  I write for Baen and my commenters make shivs out of dictionary covers.  No refined place, this According To Hoyt.  In fact I think the lady called us barbarians.  Or something.)

What I meant though is the extent to which writing blog posts precludes writing fiction.  The answer must be… I’m not sure.

When I did the blog tour for Darkship Thieves, non-fiction was a new endeavor.  It took me a day to write a thousand word essay, the same it took me for a short story or 10k words on a novel.  Sometimes, if the mind was slow, it took me a week.  For six months I did nothing but blog tour (I want to book another of those, so if you have a blog and are willing to host it, email me at sahoyt – at- hotmail -dot – com.  I should start in early to mid October and carry on through December, at which time I’ll start blogging for A Few Good Men, as well because it comes out in March.  If you have a blog and wish to host me, you get to lay restrictions on me or whatever you’d like.)  This helped sell Darkship Thieves.  It did NOT help my income, though.  (Payment is at least a year later by contract and besides, that one has barely earned out now, two and a half years later.)  So it was part of the annus horriblis of 5k income.

If I wrote the nonfiction, I couldn’t write fiction all day or, sometimes, for a week.

Clearly I’ve defeated that, since I roll out of bed and write this blog.  (Well today involved dealing with kid issues before blogging.  And so, I’m scattered and late.)

However, I’ll confess some posts take it out of me, and make it hard to concentrate on fiction.  Also, some posts require a lot of energy.  I’m postponing one (probably till Saturday) because it will either be a full out rant or… well… in either case, it will require energy.

I remember reading a Shakespeare Scholar who said if he was writing the sonnets while he wrote some play (I think Two Gentlemen of Verona) no wonder it was such thin gruel.   This puzzled me at the time, but it is true.  Say I’m mid novel, and someone asks for a short, and the short comes out heavy and hot (not that way you pervs!) rushing forth full of life.  I have to take a day before I resume the novel, or the novel will be pathetic and lifeless till I forget the short.

With the blog I have to walk the fine line of still making the posts interesting enough to be worth your time (and occasional money.  This babbler works for tips) and not draining the novels of energy and excitement.

Still on the third hand, as some people have pointed out, there is such a thing as publicity and not exactly by design, this blog seems to be my best tool for that.  I didn’t plan it that way – facebook is so much less work.  It is just the way it is.  The number of fan letters I get that say “I read your blog and bought this book–” outweighs all other methods of promo save the blog tour.

So, what to do?  Well, I’ve tried writing a week of posts in advance.  The problem is, because the posts proceed from “what is passing at the moment” it’s very hard to conjure seven topics I feel passionate about one after the other.  I’ve managed four, and it takes me pretty much a full writing day.

This is not to announce I’m giving up the blog – as I said, it seems my most effective publicity tool.  OTOH it takes a lot of time and effort.  But then I gave up sleep for lent three years ago, so mwah ah ah ah ah.

I guess what I’m trying to say is that anything else you do that involves words can cannibalize your writing, and you need to be aware of that.  Teaching or talking in panels does that for me.

While I’m not like the young writer who thought she had a quota of words and couldn’t even talk on the phone for fear of wasting them – I am conscious of a limited supply of “push”, of energy to give the words.  And sometimes, I simply won’t have it.  Which is when I sit here going “uh…. duh.”

What to do about it?  I don’t know.  Part of this, and part of the reason I think the blog is effective is that I ENJOY the blog and ya’ll’s contributions.

Honestly, though, the greatest drain is “what to write about.”  Yeah, just fresh from a trip to DC, I can tell you that my GPS is trying to kill me.  And it was the perfect post for a day when I didn’t have much brain.  Yes, I’m contemplating a post on conspiracy and sociability.  And a post on revolutions.  And a post on whether women are needed.  (The guys can shut up now.  Like all the idiot men who say men are no longer needed – that’s what is going to turn into a rant – I happen to imagine myself as the sole surviving woman in a world full of males.  Oh, wait… my female friends and female commenters in this blog can stay too.  There’s enough for all of us.  As for the rest of women… sucks to be them. :)   And lest someone takes offense, of COURSE I’m joking.  It is a rebuttal to the New York Time’s continued attempts to Onionize itself, by printing an article on how men are obsolete.)  Those will all be serious posts and therefore energyy draining, but probably worth it.  And I have a guest post on hand from my friend Tedd Roberts.

On the other hand, that’s all I have on deck, right now.  No other post ideas.  So… all of you… what would you like to hear about?  I noted Beth making notes for low tech societies.  If my upbringing is worth something it is first hand knowledge of those and there are surprising accomodations.  And I or one of the people here who research/read history for fun can probably elucidate stuff I don’t now.  By that I mean not just “tell us about your childhood” but “How did people get around this?” or “did you have that?” or “I’m writing in society x – how did they do y?”

Then there is the fact some of you might be crazy enough to solicit my opinion on serious issues.  There’s a lot of opinions in here, and they’re worth what you pay for them.  And we can go into more Human Wave stuff, but ask me questions, please, because I’m finishing two novels and I’m writer of very little brain.  Stuff like “Sarah, how does human wave reconcile distopias?  You’re aware your books are not all fluffy bunnies?” are welcome.

Also, I will take guest posts.  If you think it’s worth it, I wouldn’t mind doing a guest post once a week or so from different people each time.  Just let me know what you wish to blog on, and if you’re one of the regulars I’ll probably take it.  (Though I might tweak it, she says, not thinking RES will want to do a guest post, but afraid of the punny depths he’d sink to.)

Also none of you have sent me announcements of upcoming stuff.  Have you all been idle?  (Cracks whip.)

Anyway – send questions my way, either via email or in comments here.  Questions, suggestions, oranges, characters…. whatever you have on hand.  I can ramble about a lot of things, but I need to be pointed in A direction first.

And now I’m going to take my scattered self and go work on Noah’s Boy.

Fresh and Hot

Fresh stories.  Freshly written.  Come get them while they’re fresh…

When I was a kid you’d literally wake up in the more urban areas (not thank heavens, the village) to the yells of various food vendors.  The sun would barely be looking out of a still-darkish sky, when bread vendors, pastry vendors, vegetable vendors and everyone else would be roaming around screaming their heads off.  It was all “fresh and hot this” “cold and tasty that.”

The screaming in the village started at around noon.  We were small enough that everyone knew who had what kind of vegetables just maturing that time, and so there was no point hawking.  People would go – quietly – to their neighbor who had a bumper crop of carrots and enter upon a mutually agreeable arrangement, sometimes in exchange for a few eggs “because I hear those hens of yours are laying like crazy.”  (I did mention at some point that until I went to middle school, in the next village over, I thought money was a wholly superfluous affectation and couldn’t understand why some people were so attached to it, right?  Of course most of the stuff bought and sold in the village WAS for money– the big stuff: rents paid, an account run on the general store for food, clothes – but all I ever saw as I followed my grandmother around – she was the most entertaining person of my acquaintance – was this sort of “accommodation dealing”  that involved a chicken for an arrangement to provide milk for a month, or a bag of onions for a basket of pears.)  The stores provided what little the village didn’t grow or make for itself, and everyone knew where those were too.  Bread was a gentlemanly thing, quietly arranged, paid a week in advance and delivered before people woke up.

I still miss that and more than once have wondered if there would be a market for that sort of service.  (There probably would be in NYC or somewhere similar, and probably not in this type of economy.)  People made their… bread subscription, then hung a bag at their back door (I imagine here there would need to be locking delivery boxes, particularly in the big cities.)  These bags, needless to say immediately became a matter of competition among village matrons, so they were fantastically embroidered, adorned with lace, spotless and starched.  Into that bag went whatever your daily order was: six rolls, two pastries and four sweet rolls, say.  (Ours was usually only ten plain rolls.  Mom didn’t believe in fancy, though she might buy me a sweet roll when she went grocery shopping on Saturday.)  So when you woke and groped your way downstairs, you would collect the bread from the door while coffee was brewing.  It was usually still warm and crusty-crackling.  Yes, I missed it when I moved here.  (Though it’s no longer done that way in Portugal, because they too would need lock boxes and even so, trust me, someone would steal the box.)

Anyway, so the only people who yelled like banshees were the fishwives, who usually got to the village around noon, having stopped at the other villages on the way from the seaside (by bus.  Picture that.)  Oh, there was also the oil and olive seller, but he came only once a week.  Also prone to shrieking their (irregular) visits down main street were: the pot and pan mender, the rag dealer (mostly buyer) and the elastics and lace woman (for some reason, and proving I had to be a writer, or they’d lock me up in the madhouse, because the poor lady had one leg shorter than the other and walked funny, at age three or so, I decided her legs were made of elastic and she ate children.  I was utterly convinced she used her elastic legs to reach upward into second floor windows and steal sleeping children from their beds for a snack.  I still can’t think of that poor creature without shuddering.  Of course, my loving family catching on to my fear, used the poor elastic seller as a boogey man to keep me under control.)

Anyway, the point of this – if you’re not quite catching on – is that in commerce reduced to its elementary form, people had to hawk their own wares – UNLESS they did something established, in an established place, in which case people knew where to find them.  You wouldn’t catch the pharmacist roaming the streets screaming.  You wouldn’t catch even the local dairy farmer going around yelling “Exceptionally fine cheeses.”

Now, if these people – not the apothecary – had booths in one of the local fairs around the village – and many of them had – there they would yell.  The way the fairs are, many of them have permanent infrastructure, anything ranging from stalls to tiny buildings, usually made of stone, and with iron gates (the buildings.)  This infrastructure belongs to the fair, and the vendors lease a spot.  Buildings are more expensive than a stone table, and a stone table covered with a awning of course more expensive than a mere stone table.

The fair takes place once a week, and usually is arranged in “sections.”  If you’re a clothes seller you’re put with the clothes sellers, not the fish mongers.  If you’re a meat seller, you’re also in a section.  (BTW and because I’m long-winded, some of the infrastructure was built by Roman Emperors.  Some by medieval kings, and the more modern dates from the nineteenth century.)

Anyway, the sedate village sellers who wouldn’t dream of screaming their wares, do scream like nobody’s business when they’re in the fair.  “Juicy Oranges, the sweetest” might get someone to come to you instead of the guy next door who waxes his oranges so they shine.

I hear there was a time that writers were more like the staid sellers and farmers in the village.  They wrote their books; they handed them in.  It was the job of the publisher to tell people how great your books were and to put them in the place where people expected to find books.  I also hear – and this is probably rumor – that at one time all publishers were more like Baen: they had a slant into the market, a view they pushed, something that made them unique.  The reader related to the publisher and appreciated the publisher’s seal of approval which, in turn, made it possible to buy anything from the publisher, sight unseen.  After you read a few by an author you might look for an author, TOO but up till then it was “I trust this publisher, so I’ll buy this month’s books.”

I say I hear these things, because I’ve never experienced them, and what is reported of the field is often unreliable self-mythologizing.

But I do know that it wasn’t normal, until at least the nineties for writers to have to sell themselves to the extent they do now.  I think part of what ate the individuality of the publishers was the fact that the people they hired all went to the same schools and all lived within ten square miles of each other.  A “collective point of view” was established that it wasn’t considered decent to buck, and all of them agreed on what was “good” – which left only Baen out of the circle j– of love, and only because Jim Baen was a stubborn cuss… er, had a very strong personality.  Otherwise, it would have gone the way of the others.

Then next hit the small number of distributors, the concentrating of the bookstores into chains, and next thing you know, every author was those vendors in the stalls at the local fair.

Even if you’re a Baen author and what you’re selling is, in point of fact, Japanese pears, how are you going to even be seen, in the middle of all the orange vendors.  And for that matter, how are people going to know they might like Japanese pears if no one else sells them and they’ve never tried them.  (And to an extent, this explains – but doesn’t justify – big publishers’ obsession with books just like the last book.  You might be producing twilight clones, but at least people know what that is, how to ask for it, and might decide they want one.  If what you’re selling is unique, you first have to convince people to take a bite.)

So, if you’re a writer, say, like me, who could be called unique (mostly because the other things you COULD call me are probably obscene and not safe for a family blog) what in heck can you do but cross the metaphorical streets of the literary village yelling “Fresh hot fiction, come and get it while it’s fresh.”

That is actually possibly worse (though better too – more on that later) in the global market place indie publishing has opened for us.  So many offerings.  And why would people buy it, if they don’t know it exists?

Trust me, if people don’t know your books are there, they won’t buy them, no matter how good they are.  For the years I worked for traditional publishing, grinding out sometimes six books a year which – none of them – made it to bookstore shelves, or at least no bookstores near me, and which – OFTEN – got accidentally left out of the publisher’s own catalogue, I learned this dictum well.

So you have to self promote.  And there are ways to do it.  What are those ways?  This is one of the most frequently asked questions by newbies.

First, as with writing, what I’ve found is this: use the medium that works for you.  I am long-winded and odd, so this blog seems to work for me, as do blog tours when a book is ready for release.  Facebook too, to an extent.  I never got Twitter which seems to require your living more online than I’m willing to do.  But this is personality.  If you feel Twitter is your thing do it.  If your easiest publicity is via pintrest, use it.  If you’re personable, have a winning smile and enjoy the company of others and – this is important – if you live in the Eastern part of the country where there’s a con every weekend in driving distance, then the con circuit might be for you.  If your book is about quilting, you might consider getting a booth at craft fairs.

But all of that is to our purposes nothing.  More important is to remember two things: to whom are you selling?  And what are you selling?

In the old days when you had to sell to publishers or never get in at all, it paid to affect the sort of personality they were taught to admire: intellectual with a touch of the bohemian and something mysterious about you.  It also helped to be visually appealing (though you could get around that by being SPECTACULARLY unappealing there triggering the “must prove I’m not prejudiced” reaction) and by blowing your own horn.  I know at least one “major” author who climbed very quickly via telling every publisher at every con how wonderful he was.  He was telling everyone he was the next best thing in writing before he sold a single pro story.  Because publishers were fundamentally insecure and unable to tell what was good (there are reasons for that, but it’s long and not here) they believed him.  Success.

I watched this tactic in a sort of awe, because well…  It worked.  And yet, it was so weird and so against all my early training in behavior, that I would need to not be myself to use it.

But it worked, because what the publishers were buying was not the writing but the writer as a marketable product, which is what they believed in.  Books were, after all, fungible, so they wanted a writer they could trot out and tell people was wonderful.  How much easier to do that when the author himself believes he’s the second coming of Charles Dickens?

Nowadays… well…  It might very well still work.  There are people still getting in the old route.  I suspect though those are mostly you know, old college roommates and second cousins and other people personally KNOWN to the publisher.

For the rest of us they seem to be looking at how you sell indie.  (And if you’re smart, you’re looking at how you sell indie, too, and comparing it to what the traditionals offer.)  Or, if you’ve gotten in at a low or midlist level, the publisher is looking at your numbers.

How do you increase those?  Well… you hawk the book.  The method you use is your own.  It might even be youtubes of your cat dancing with the book, for all I care.

Remember, though, it’s the book you’re selling – not yourself.  Telling the world how wonderful you are seems to provoke in most people a sort of recoil and a doubt.  I know a local writer whom con organizers call ‘the rudest man on Earth” – he’s not.  He’s trying to self promote and is completely clueless.  So instead of telling people about his book, about his subject and how wonderful it is, he behaves as if he were selling to an old style publisher, and acts like he’s an a’tist and tells everyone how wonderful HE is – which when people are looking at micro-press books and pays in copies publications fails to have much impact.  (It also, as he gets desperate, acquires a tinny, off-key tone that makes the whole thing worse.)

The readers don’t think books are fungible, and readers care about THE BOOK, not you.  (Of course, when you have a blog, it’s hard not to talk about yourself, but do try not to make it just a series of boasts, okay?  Write about the interesting stuff around you.  There must be SOMETHING. [ Hey, if I blog long enough I’ll find something interesting about me, too])

This I can do.  As a writer, my life is usually circumscribed to the desk, though I have wildly exciting grocery trips and kid-related stuff.  HOWEVER as a writer, I think up interesting worlds and read interesting stuff to setup those worlds, and spend a lot of time analyzing society and the world.  So, you see, I have stuff to talk about that relates (at least sideways and backwards) to my books.  And I’ve found talking about THOSE with lots of enthusiasm works.  It certainly works far better than walking down the village street shouting “Buy me, I’m hot.”  (Well, we didn’t have THOSE in the village.  Too small for that.  Besides, the two ladies willing to… never mind.)

As for those who are totally indie and in the global market place: if your marketplace is big enough, even hawking won’t do.  You can do a minimal and get people buying one or two books and then word of mouth might take off.  You can even get books to blog reviews, and that sometimes helps.

But ultimately, in a big enough market place, what seems to work is to have the big shop.  People who are strangers are more likely to see the big establishment or the stall with the colorful cover.  How do you do that?  Well… mostly by having a lot of merchandise out.  That way, if someone stumbles on you and buys one, they’ll come back and buy all the others: hundreds of books, perhaps, if you have that many out.  (And keep in mind a short story is a “book” in this market.)

All the ones I know making a living in this manner put out a lot of books on a regular schedule.  I only have a few so far.  But I’m writing more.

And meanwhile, because I’m also on the traditional market place, I’ll continue the yelling, “Good, Fresh Fiction, hot and … er… fresh.  Buy it here.  We don’t wax our characters.”

The Achingness of Culture

It always amuses me when non-writers think about writers.  In the same way it amuses me when “literary” writers talk about writing.  I amuses me even more when people much younger than I decry the evils of internet communication and roll on the floor moaning about language degradation and other such stuff.

So, you understand, ladies and gentlemen, that this David Swindle piece was like getting my own comedy show bright and early in the morning.  You see, I was stuck for something to write about and lo and behold my friend Kate sent me this.

Swindle amuses me, in general, because he seems to have got a job writing for a conservative website and decided that “conservative” means “fuddy duddy.”  It’s like he never met a conservative in real life, doesn’t get that the term is completely out of synch with what these people actually believe (by and large.  There are, of course, SOME fuddy duddys) and thinks they’re sort of like the dad in 50s sitcoms.  Therefore, like the idiot shooter carrying a chick-fil-a bag to fit in, he puts on his mental sweater and takes his “the world is coming to the end because of those d*mn whipper snappers doing doughnuts on my lawn” attitude.  And he thinks he sounds conservative, instead of odd, clueless and definitely young.

Yes, David, the world is coming to an end.  What’s more, it’s always been.  And yep, language as we know it is ending, ending, I say.  Your friends worrying about it are SO totally right.  Because language as each generation knows it ends every twenty five years or so and the accumulation of changes means that Shakespeare is now hard to read for most people.  Which means that we can no longer of course express ourselves with any richness of feeling, any thought, any depth.

Let me interject here, that I grew up in Portugal in an era when people were JUST starting to get phones into their houses.  The normal arrangement when I was three or four was for the nearest shop to take calls for everyone around.  And when you got called to the phone it was BAD.  By the time I was six, we all had phones and people called their friends a propos not much.  (Mom had EPIC gossip sessions.)  This meant we were inundated by articles about the gentle art of letter writing being lost, and this leading to a time of darkness when people didn’t know how to write.

This is what this piece reminded me of.

I am the mother of two kids who grew up in the internet age. Yep, they know all the texting abbreviations, and they have AIMed with friends since they were four or so.  Their language on the phone when talking to friends is half foreign dialect that I have to think to understand.  Eh.  So was ours.  Yes, my older son says “Lols” when amused, but only when he’s in a very informal situation.  In a non-informal situation he can write rings around most people, including dear old mom who makes her living with words.  So, incidentally, can his younger brother.  Depth of feeling?  Language levels?  Oh, please.  As in any other era, what in heavens name does fast communication have to do with the more literate, feeling-filled one?  Do you really think Shakespeare ordered fish pie in iambic pentameter?  (You might, for all I know.)

If “kids these days” can’t express themselves coherently in writing – and I’ll give you most of them can’t.  I’ve read them – it has to do with two things: first, the ability to express oneself coherently in writing is like the ability to draw something that remotely resembles the model.  There is training of course, but there has to be natural ability.  In various countries and over the last half century, I’ve come to the conclusion most people’s use of language is like most people drawing stick figures.  And it’s always been.  (I wouldn’t kick too hard.  It’s what allows some of us to make a living.)

Second even innate ability needs training.  You need to know the proper form of the language you’re writing in.  Your vocabulary must be large enough.  You must have read widely enough to KNOW the “tricks of the trade.”  Well – I know that’s where you think the internet fails you.  You are wrong.  This has been going down hill since I was in school.  It’s the schools, the schools suck.  They try to teach the kids they can’t learn and learning is “hard” – seriously, the way they go about teaching anything language related is backwards and sideways and amounts to playing keep away.  Instead of teaching the kids to sound out words, they want them to treat words like ideograms.  Instead of teaching them grammar rules, they want them to stumble on them by try-fail.  Etc.  Most current pedagogical theory is IN FACT a blockade in the way of learning.  On top of that, the schools – apparently under the impression someone died and made them the arbiters of taste – select only “worthy” books, full of victimhood and Marxism.  Most kids hate these books and never tumble on to the fact that not all books are like that.  (And to be honest, until recently, if they went by bookstores, they might be confirmed in their fears.)

In fact, to the extent the internet is affecting this trend at all, the effect is positive.  The kids mostly interface via typing and reading – so they have to learn to read which makes books more accessible to them.  And before you say they only learn to read texting – no.  From the sample I see, these kids eventually start to read news, political blogs, recipes, and A LOT of fan fiction.  Fan fiction is a mixed lot.  Anything without a gate keeper is.  There is fan fiction that makes you want to cry and pluck your eyes out.  HOWEVER some of it is more than publishable quality.  And ALL but the very bottom of the barrel expresses emotion, and delves into whatever it was your la-di-da friends thought kids had lost the ability to talk about: the secret recesses of the deceitful human heart, or whatever the heck it was.  They might punt the occasional pronoun (like, who doesn’t?) their grammar rules having been taught by people who believe in “environmental grammar” and “cultural correctness” might be shaky, but from what I’ve seen, the feeling, the sweep and the story telling is there.

So, stop fearing internet will rob the future.  It might very well save it.

As for the method one uses to write.  My kids love moleskine planners.  I buy moleskine art notebooks – mostly because they make a nice pocket sized one I can take in my purse if there’s something I want to sketch.  I would love to buy their notebooks for jotting notes like when I suddenly find myself in the middle of a news event I didn’t see coming.  But they’re really expensive, and I usually end up using hotel pads.

The whole thing about using notebooks to get the depth of feeling or what not, reminded me of when I was buying the house before last and the realtor told me that the enclosed back porch facing the mountains was “perfect to keep you inspired to write.”  I sort of blinked at her and didn’t say anything.  Since I wasn’t writing about mountains, and since writing means looking at the screen not the view, I thought she was out of her rocking mind.  But I also knew it’s a common misconception of people who AREN’T writers and who view what I do as a sort of romantic affliction, like consumption in the 19th century.  They think we roam around aching, just aching with sensibility, instead of having our heads invaded by a cavalcade of zanies who want their stories told.

Yes, perhaps moleskine is too good for me.  I prefer a computer with a fast processor and a decent monitor.  I’ve written when I’m inspired.  I’ve written when I’m not inspired.  I’ve written while happy, while bored, while ill, while tired.  I once dragged myself up after childbirth and crawled on hands and knees (I was on morphine for a raging uterine infection and it affected my sense of balance) to the computer to write a story.  Took me the whole day to type, but hey, it was an honorable mention in best fantasy and horror for 1994.

Now – do I sometimes hit a wall and have to write by hand?  Of course.  Interestingly, this is usually for OUTLINES.  This is where I need to think before every line and not be beguiled by my own word-bullshit that papers over stuff not thought through.  So sometimes I take the notebook.  The same thing when I’m struggling with the opening of a novel and trying to nail down the voice.  But once things start flowing I need to go to the keyboard.

You see, slinging words is what I do for a living.  It’s just as if I made pots for a living.  The artisan taking a class at the local continuing education center might choose to do without a wheel. He/she might see great value in the lumpy pot this produces.  But even a craft-level potter who lives from it will use a wheel.  It’s a tool that makes the work easier.

That’s what computers are.  I’ve written with quills.  I’ve written with ball point pens.  I’ve written with typewriters.  I’ve written with computers.  In general the more advanced tool and the easier to use the more I like it.  It makes it more immediate and easier to put my words into stories and the stories into the readers’ hands.

The older, artistic implements that make the work harder?  That’s for people who mistake themselves for nineteenth century poets with a vaguely romantic affliction.

I don’t write to feel superior to the illiterate hoi polloi, so putting on airs doesn’t interest me.  Producing good work (defined as what sells) does.  I’m less interested in decrying the democratization of writing, and more in praising the renaissance of reading.  You see, I work for a living…